The Ninety-Five Theses on the Power and Efficacy of Harmful Content

Wow! First I wanted to write a few sentences to Qarls Post (http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/468826), but then I found this Thread. It is the most comprehensive and insightful Beta Feedback post I read and i completly agree in most points. Additionally many good contributions from other players, so that i hope Quarl and all other GGG-Members read this thread. Really awesome. Thanx, pneuma!

Starting to feel I need to make a significant sized major post, since all the big feedbackers are doing it. Pneuma, Moos, Xendran, etc.

Guess I will wait for Slayer/slurms to post one.... or does his GR/infused shield change count?

"

Real_Wolf wrote:

Starting to feel I need to make a significant sized major post, since all the big feedbackers are doing it. Pneuma, Moos, Xendran, etc.

Guess I will wait for Slayer/slurms to post one.... or does his GR/infused shield change count?

It's beyond weird how much the global voice to this game has changed and I think it's a bad thing man. I haven't seen any "No F you man! This game is awesome!" or "Go back to d3 fanboy!" posts. I think those people literally left the game and all that are left are the ones who really want a sweet ARPG like d2 but different and modernized+unique.

I know they say things have to get worse before they can get better but oh man these are dark days when I can express all of the things I feel are imbalanced and people actually agree.

Your feedback is always welcomed by me because I think you know what you are talking about but at this point I feel like if the voice isn't loud enough already we will never be heard.

If half of pneuma's points get adressed we will have one mighty fine ARPG.

I bow to you, sir.

Speaking of the WED Gem:
Where's my Physical Projectile Damage gem, GGG?

PPD + Increased fire = people might actually use burning arrow.
People still won't use physical because its garbage, but at least a positive change could come out of something that in th elong run will benefit the people who do attempt it.

At the very least, it would make people try out physical RoA (and then quickly switch to conversion for elemental damage).

"

Xendran wrote:

Speaking of the WED Gem:
Where's my Physical Projectile Damage gem, GGG?

PPD + Increased fire = people might actually use burning arrow.
People still won't use physical because its garbage, but at least a positive change could come out of something that in th elong run will benefit the people who do attempt it.

I've never played a bow-user, so I'm basing this entirely off of my experience so far with physical melee, but... you're probably doing the same thing that Qarl was talking about, where people thought burning damage was the weakest kind, or EB was crap. Physical damage keys you in to all kinds of life leech itemization; life leech is physical's status effect. Grab a Carnage Heart (best physical amulet in the game), actually build a physical damage user, and quit complaining.

I have no intentions of ever building a physical bow user ever again.
Elemental is still vastly superior, however, and "works" is not the same as "on par with" or "well balanced".

"

Grab a Carnage Heart (best physical amulet in the game), actually build a physical damage user, and quit complaining.

Been there, done that.
It doesn't work anywhere near as well. Sure, you CAN technically complete things, but it's pretty trash compared to elemental.

"

I'm basing this entirely off of my experience so far with physical melee,

http://pathofexile.gamepedia.com/Melee_Physical_Damage
http://pathofexile.gamepedia.com/Melee_Damage_on_Full_Life

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

With the new damage refactor, I was hitting myself with reflections every attack, and now I'm planning to take IR while I wasn't planning it before before the problem gets out of hand.

If IR will be removed, it will probably kill hybrid armor/evasion gear, as with such gear you are unable to gather enough neither armor nor evasion to be viable late game. With IR, you are at least able to convert evasion to armor and focus on one form of defense.

On Anarchy, I have EB wander templar, which uses armor/es hybrid gear on every slot and runs Grace to give him at least basic evasion. He is, straightly put, weak. He is viable on low level maps but only because it's a range. I strongly doubt, that melee character can go this way.

I also level EB FP shadow, which will use evasion and evasion/es hybrid armor on every slot. As he can focus more on evasion and runs Grace, he seems to be more viable, but he is still @ Cruel so I have to wait for 30 lvls more to make better comparison.

Maybe, instead of removing IR, there should be added keystone, which converts armor to evasion? Because, the main problem is, that hybrid defense is not viable, you have to decide, what you are focus on.

I would like also point to aura stacking "problem". I love aura stacking for 2 reason: (1) it is fun and unique mechanism and (2) it makes me more gear independent.

And the latter is very, very important for many , many players, with drops as they are. For example, I was asked in other topic, why I don't see drawback of The Bringer of Rain. And the answer is simple. Because before I acquired TBoR I was doing 71+ lvl maps in such helmet and chest as I haven't had any better combo:



If I would not stack auras, I would at most be able to run Lunaris till the fu[self censored] resurrect in looking for better gear and probably quite this game long ago.

The problem with passives nerfs is, that they are just inconvenience for well geared no-lifers but for real-lifers who would like to play PoE in free time and can't spend hundreds of hours grinding or trading for better gear, it's "will I be able to pass Merc gear check or not". So nerfs of life nodes or ES nodes doesn't change much for owners of Khaoms or Vaal regalia with 1000 ES but it was really nerf hammer for many self found players.

I'd like to chime in and say that I think there needs to exist a clear distinction between generally being overpowered and niche overpowered. In such a game revolving around the development of a theme/concept/idea/character, I like to see player progression over time (and with great effort) into being extremely powerful (in their own right). Every build should have the potential to be supremely strong at what they do..but garbage at another thing.

Ragnarok Online before the renewal patch was a not-so-ideal example of "overpowered" classes. The catch was that players could only BE strong in a certain aspect, i.e: a PvP oriented High Priest has excellent sustain and support but has garbage offensive capabilities and couldn't solo level to save his/her life WHEN compared to an alternative build designed to do just that. Also couldn't kill shit and that was fine - you built your character to do just that. Not be some omnipowerful being.


I would argue that part of the problem behind the focus on certain skills in the game (i.e: Spark) is the lack of meaningful alternatives at present. This coupled with the introduction of mechanics that negate weaknesses of certain builds (Shavronne's Wrappings, Eye of Chayula, Ghost Reaver) allow for niche builds to not just shine in whichever area they're good in but become generally strong everywhere.

Its been my hope that come Act 3.5, we're going to see more interesting ways of introducing danger to the game without just flat out increasing raw damage to monsters and giving them auras. Think of the typically mediocre Puncture monster. Not all that dangerous to Life-based builds generally, but lo behold - vulnerability and you're in a tough situation. These mechanics have GOOD interaction because they don't provide outright dangerous situations but force players to THINK about how to best deal with it if and when it does show up.

Doing that (alongside addressing the core concerns pneuma has highlighted) paves way for meaningful decisions as to how players design their builds. What are my strengths? What are my weaknesses? Can I tackle this map? If I marginally can, what can I do to minimize my risk while doing it?


N.B: Its worth noting that BECAUSE of the current monster system we have this overemphasis on powerful uniques designed to "enable" builds (I use "enable" sarcastically because these don't enable anything). Weaknesses are weaknesses, they shouldn't magically disappear. Auxium is a prime culprit. Its not the most stellar belt in the world BUT it removes one of the core weaknesses that ES builds have. Bad bad design.

Good design is having to choose whether to carry a Heat flasks (or not if you can deal with it), or otherwise sinking heavy points into the "Avoid Status Effects" cluster. THAT is a meaningful decision if ever.


We really need to revisit the age old adage: Jack-of-All-Trades, Master of None. You either be really good at something or reasonably competent at everything.

"

Aux wrote:

"

pneuma wrote:

Whatever feelings exist for not wanting to scorn diamond/eternal supporters need to be quashed.

Until you have gone through this process yourself, you can't know how completely wrong you are.

Other than that I'd say your post is pretty spot on.

Without actual details, your post is only nominally authoritative, and affords the image of a black box out of which shitty uniques tumble (with troubling, increasing frequency) when someone gives GGG $1,000.

Until you expound a little on what the process really entails, we have your word and a pile of mama-cost-removing, always-hitting Mary Sue Sticks, to say nothing of the weakness of "you don't know the pain I had to endure in spending $1,000 and making this AWESOME THING!"

Were you NDA'd? Don't be a primadonna about it, then. Being tactless doesn't strengthen your argument.

---

Of the concerns outlined by Pneuma, I'd say that the skill gem reward system is the most naggingly obnoxious (though not the most egregious). Addressing Templar's six-times-awarded Melee Physical Damage against the Duelist's one(!) by tweaking the number of times awarded, for instance, would be a simple type of step to take in the direction of sensible implementation.

I agree most, however, with his assessment of GGG's lack of respect for their onus in making changes during a beta. The abhorrence they appear to hold for making broad changes, of which consequences could hold the kernel of positive change in the long run, is maddening.

If GGG wishes to reverse course, they can't take meager steps and claim "It's the Long Plays, children!" They must act decisively and, in as many cases as a true beta (not a "soft release") might hold, grandly.